|
US foreign policy in President George W. Bush's second term is likely to have a different look from that in his first term with the new administration already in place.
But it is still expected that the new administration will make no radical change in the established policy. Various restrictions at home and abroad mean the new government could be more self-restrained while handling foreign affairs.
The new administration met a very strong voice of opposition among American people on its foreign policies such as the policy on Iraq.
Besides opposition from Democrats and the public, the new administration is also expected to meet a lot of obstacles even within the Republican Party. Some moderate Republicans are opposed to the United States being overstretched throughout the world.
The Iraq issue will remain the toughest nut to crack for the administration. Since May 2003 when the United States declared the end of large-scale military action in Iraq, security in the Arab country has not improved. If anything, it has deteriorated. Since April, Iraqi Shi'ite Muslims have also joined the country's raging anti-American armed struggle.
To help Iraq's interim government hold the January 30 election smoothly, the United States has promised to add more troops to the chaotic country. The election is expected to be held as scheduled under fortified US military presence.
But uninterrupted anti-American insurgences in Iraq have made people deeply suspicious whether the post-election security situation in the country will improve as the United States expects it to, and if it does, how long it will take.
With these uncertainties, the US is expected to exercise self-restraint and refrain from taking unilateral action while dealing with international issues.
It is a prevailing opinion that the Bush administration that embarked on two pieces of military action in Afghanistan and Iraq in its first term, will put more energy into solving domestic issues in the second term. This includes how to boost the American economy, reduce the colossal budget deficit and promote social security system reforms, which are all big concerns for ordinary Americans.
As far as US foreign policy is concerned, anti-terror will still be at top of the new administration's diplomatic agenda.
It is the US government's unambiguous policy that the anti-terror campaign should include stabilizing the security situation in Iraq and Afghanistan, and promote peace in the Middle East.
One of the important reasons behind the US going to war with Iraq was its intention to promote "democracy" in the region. US decision-makers clearly said the United States would continue spreading "democracy" and eliminating tyranny throughout the world.
In their eyes, the rampancy of terrorism in the Middle East region is closely related with the existence of Islamic fundamentalism in this region and its lack of democracy and freedom.
In its new term, the Bush administration will continue to push for non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), especially nuclear weapons.
In East Asia, the nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula will remain the most pressing issue straining the nerves of the United States.
With the brokering of the Chinese Government, three rounds of six-party talks have been held over the past two years, and the talks mechanism on the settlement of the nuclear issue has already taken shape.
Yet no substantial progress has been made because the United States and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), two key players in the issue, have been widely divided on some concrete procedures and details.
Following recent visits to the DPRK by two US Congress delegations, new signs of compromise have emerged in this region. The United States reaffirmed it has no intention of launching military attacks against the DPRK or toppling its government. Bush has also claimed on different occasions that his government is committed to peacefully solving the nuclear issue with the DPRK through the six-party talks formula, which also includes China, Russia, the Republic of Korea and Japan.
Still, the settlement of the stalemated Palestinian-Israeli talks and the Middle East peace process will come high on the agenda of the new US administration.
The United States has incorporated the Israeli-Palestinian peace process into the Greater Middle East Initiative. Bush says he supports a Palestinian government elected by Palestinians themselves, a government aimed at carrying out political reform and reining in terrorism and violence.
Sino-US ties in the next four years are expected to enter a new, stable period.
In fact, American relations with China in the last four years remained generally stable, and bilateral cooperation in the economy, anti-terror and prevention of WMDs were continuously expanded. The two countries are likely to maintain and improve such momentum in the new term of the US Government. In addition to official ties, people-to-people exchanges, such as in cultural, scientific and technological, education and sport fields, are also booming.
Another outstanding character of Sino-US relations is that the two countries are now turning some fields that brewed friction and even confrontation in the past into ones of cooperation. The nuclear issue on the Korean Peninsula serves as a typical example.
China and the United States are still divided on the Taiwan question. For example, the United States has never abandoned its loyalty to the Taiwan Relations Act while adhering to the one-China policy. While China has always regarded the act as an American domestic bill aimed at interfering in China's internal affairs.
But at a joint press conference in December 2003 when Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao paid a visit to the United States, Bush expressed his strong opposition to Taiwan leader Chen Shui-bian's attempt to unilaterally change the status of the island.
Since then, it has become more obvious that China and the United States are both committed to maintaining a stable cross-Straits situation.
With economic and trade ties increasingly deep, disputes and friction between the two countries in this field are inevitably on the increase. But the two countries now have normal mechanisms in hand to handle economic disputes.
Both countries are World Trade Organization members submitted to the world body's trade rules. The two countries have established some high-level trade organs and mechanisms, such as the establishment of a joint Sino-US economic and trade commission, to deal with economic and trade friction.
Prospering economic ties, however, do not mean bilateral relations in all fields are smooth and good. China's growth is, to some extent, misunderstood in the US.
(China Daily January 26, 2005)
|
